Grave doubts about the success of AH2 TOD

[Toad]

No, Beet1e, I really don't think we're on the same side. See, I still don't even see the need for a "war". I only see the need for a fight.  

The suicide dweeb per se doesn't bother me in the least. It's his $15/mo. If he wants to dive bomb the field outhouse and auger, hey, whatever blows his skirt up.

It's the balance of the thing, chum, to which you allude and apparently agree. I am somewhat in sympathy with the bomber pilots that attack HQ (even though I don't do that). Done in a manner that assures reasonable success, I'm sure it takes them an hour or so. Seems to me that, should they succeed, the damage ought to take about an hour of player time to repair.

Pretty consistent with my view on fuel, don't you agree? Takes 15 player-minutes to kill, should take somewhere on the order of 15 player-minutes to repair. Doesn't have to be a 1-1 relationship, but it surely SHOULD NOT be a 1-7 relationship either.

As for the P-51; I don't fly it nearly as much as I once did. However, if all the front line bases are at 25% and I need a quick fix, guess which plane I take. Why? Because 25% in a -51 allows some fight time. On the big maps, this is even more of a factor. Take AKDesert where much of the time you're flying "uphill" across a sector or more to the fight. An early war plane arrives with little gas and little altitude. A -51 will give a better overall chance to have a decent time. (BTW, I never plan on RTB with 25% on a big map in any plane. I'm not going waste "fight time" on commuting that length of time.)

I suspect I'm not alone in this type of choice when fuels are uniformly 25% on the front lines, either. Take off from a rear base you say? And fly another bloody sector to the fight? Not likely! WAY too much of a commute.

Face it, I'm never going to be your ideal type of player.

I think Furious had a good point. When we dropped the "Joe was killed by Tom" message, we lost a "prime motivator". Far more motivational than perks are or would ever be for me in any event.

Apparently, HT felt it was a bit too aggressive and had a bad effect on the newbs, seeing their names on the dinner menu so often.

I think the "2 kills landed by" message is a poor substitute, although perhaps it could be improved by making it tougher to get your name in lights in the better aircraft. Maybe 2 kills gets you mentioned in a C-202 but it might take 5 to get mentioned in an La-7? Don't know, just a thought.

CV control? The few times I've tried it, I found I couldn't do much quality fighting myself because I was always steering the CV to keep it from getting knocked out. Now, I'd rather just enjoy the fights and move on when it's inevitably sunk.

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by Mini D
The damage for attack planes that have been killed say within 5 minutes of destroying a ground object should be undone.  Its gamey and unrealistic, but its nothing compared to crashing replaning and re-bombing.

I wonder what impact simply reducing the fuel multiplier would have on the Main Arena, particularly regarding the impact that porked fuel plays on early war and gas guzzling planes.  Would longer overall fuel durations negatively impact the Main Arena so substantially as to offset the advantages of reducing the importance of fuel quantity?

I admit, I haven't thought much about the consequences of such an action beyond its perhaps increasing the prevalance of Yaks and La7s.  An added bonus to this plan is that HTC could implement the change immediately without programming in a fix.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[Mini D]

Originally posted by Toad
So that's what you remember? Agreeing with me?

I remember someone arguing that anyone could take all the fuel down in 2 passes.  That is now, and will forever be a rediculous statement.

But... I do think the fuel stays down too long.  And I do think that people return to continue damaging fields.  We'd probably strongly disagree as to why (fields closer together would make this easier?).

There are problems with the strat.  Some could be adjusted... most would probably agree.  These problems affect everyone.

The main disagreement comes with the fundamental belief that somehow the strat guys are being catered too at the expense of the furballers.  This argument has been presented by you and lazs on several occasions.  Every single time it meets with resistance because it is quite simply wrong.  And... because it is combative in nature.

When hangars were the only way to prohibit flight, bunkers and fuel cells were introduced along with more hangars to allow targets to be hit that were impacting, but didn't prohibit flight.  Options to do more allowing more.  The re-arm pads were later added so that taking down fuel did not prevent those that survived the attack from re-arming and refueling with undamaged planes and continuing to fight and defend.  Strat elements were added to take the fight away from the field (towns and factories).  But "HTC has ruined the game for the furballers" still persists.  Oh... that's right... it's just my "perspective" on the impact of those additions... and exactly who benifitted from them.

The addition of zones to the game seems to have driven the rebuild times to excessive limits.  The reward greatly outweighs the loss and is demonstrated on a regular basis.  That should be adressed.  Not because it impacts furballers, but because it impacts everyone.

MiniD

[Toad]

Would you like some films of folks doing it?

Emailed to you? Or do you just want to go to the TAS website and see Rude's posted flick? (See "Films of Guts and Glory"). That one is converted to AVI and lacks the text buffer but I have the AHF if you like. I believe Rude has a few more and Thunder has one as well.

Even "only bombs during a blue moon" me took out 3 tanks on a small field last night in one pass and got the field barracks on the reverse because the other fuel (next to the barracks) was down before I got there. Of course, then Mathman killed me, but the two passes/4 shacks were no problem, even for me.

Oh, and I believe these are all P-38 examples... the biggest ack-magnet jabo in the hangar.

Looks like it was a simple statement of fact to me.

Well, let's see. There have been continual additions to "strat" at the request of those interested in that sort of thing. Who should I think is being catered to? And, until recently, you never really heard much from the "the fight's the thing" crowd. Never asked for anything because nothing was needed. The fights were always there. Now, it's different and even you apparently are beginning to see what folks are pointing out.

It simply reached the point where "strat", coupled with other changes like big maps, has made the fuel limited part of the planeset essentially unusable. That's what got all this started.

That's why the previously quiet faction has started to speak out.

Your summation of the changes is your recollection. For example, I remember the "rearm pad" campaign's focus to be "I don't want to break my string of victories". IE: Guys wanted to see that "10 kills" message. I also recall the gist of the moving the maproom off the base to make it harder for tricycle gear aircraft to strafe troops running to the map room. It wasn't to "take the fight away from the field", it was to make it harder to kill the troops once they were on the ground. Just like the "carbombing" changes with the buffs.

Now, argue those points all you like but not everyone has the same memory of those changes that you do. I'm sure you figure your memory is the only correct one though.

Again, keep all the strat. Add more. I simply don't care.

But don't make things so unbalanced that one player can do damage in ~15 mintues that takes an hour + to repair while invalidating the (IMO) best part of the planeset, especially on the big maps.

Apparently that's asking too much.

[SKurj]

Getting carried away with this "suicide" porker stuff....

I've been on fuel porking runs a fair bit, and I always survive unless CAP catches me +(
2 passes?  Usually, rare to need 3...

MiniD... Toad... how you two can agree and still continue to go on and on and on...  

Maybe a change in fuel in AH is needed.. perhaps we need 10 fuel tanks per field...  perhaps some stored on the field, and some stored off the field...

Just an idea


SKurj

[NoBaddy]

Originally posted by Toad
No, Beet1e, I really don't think we're on the same side. See, I still don't even see the need for a "war". I only see the need for a fight.  

Apparently, HT felt it was a bit too aggressive and had a bad effect on the newbs, seeing their names on the dinner menu so often.

Toadster...

It ain't about what you see a need for...it's about what HT sees a need for .


He told me that the main motivator in changing the kill messages was to reduce the text buffer traffic. He also said he liked the 'advertising' possiblities of the way he chose to do it (for the players) .

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Mr. Toad
No, Beet1e, I really don't think we're on the same side. See, I still don't even see the need for a "war". I only see the need for a fight.    

Suit yourself.

If I may just draw upon the Chess analogy once more, I'd like to set out why I see strat as vital to the game. I'm not asking you to agree with me, because I know you won't.

AH without strat would be like a Chess board with no Kings. Checkmate would be impossible, and there would be no point to the game. In Chess, each player competes to deploy his pieces as effectively as possible, with checkmate as the ultimate aim - right from the opening gambit. With no Kings, it would be nothing more than moving the pieces around aimlessly. Each player could take the pieces of his opponent, but for what? No game to win...

I'm not asking for MORE strat. I'm happy with field capture, and believe it's possible to have too much strat. WB became like that. The map might have worked with 200 online, but not 25. In any case, it got so complicated that no-one fully understood it.

[Toad]

Skurj!!!!

You just made what

is now, and will forever be a rediculous statement.

MiniD will put on his "little Joe" hat and chastise you at the earliest opportunity.

You see, "two pass/no gas" is SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE. MiniD will explain it to you; perhaps without the animosity he displayed when he tried to explain it to me recently. Hard to tell.

But yeah... some sort of balancing feature is overdue.

NB, as for the kill messages, he has also offered other explanations to other folks. Not only to me, either. Ask Rude, for instance. And I know he's running the game. I know I rarely if ever requested a change in the past. However, the camel is groaning under this last straw.

Beet1e, one problem with your analogy. AH has no rules; Chess, OTOH, is completely structured. Rules, turn limits, time limits, limited movement of pieces, etc. Rules that could not work, would not work in an freewheeling MA environment.

So basically, there is no analogy. The games are not remotely related.

Beyond that, the fact that I don't see a need for a "war" DOES NOT Mean that I don't want you to have your war. Have all the war, the Chess, the rules, the structure YOU desire. Just allow me to find a place on the map to enjoy what I like to do. Just put some balance back into it. Doesn't seem like that much to ask.

(However, I've got to point out that the game progressed from beta to where we are by slowly adding more strat. In the beginning and for quite a time, there was really only "the fight". As the things you like were added, the behaviors you detest became more prevalent, more common and more "fun destroying" for everyone. That's my opinion, feel free to disagree. But before all this zone strat/resupply stuff/perks to the winners stuff was added, you rarely saw the stuff we both find less appealing in the game.

Just goes back to what Batz said.)

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Toad
Beet1e, one problem with your analogy. AH has no rules; Chess, OTOH, is completely structured. Rules, turn limits, time limits, limited movement of pieces, etc. Rules that could not work, would not work in an freewheeling MA environment.

So basically, there is no analogy. The games are not remotely related.

Beyond that, the fact that I don't see a need for a "war" DOES NOT Mean that I don't want you to have your war. Have all the war, the Chess, the rules, the structure YOU desire. Just allow me to find a place on the map to enjoy what I like to do. Just put some balance back into it. Doesn't seem like that much to ask.

(However, I've got to point out that the game progressed from beta to where we are by slowly adding more strat. In the beginning and for quite a time, there was really only "the fight". As the things you like were added, the behaviors you detest became more prevalent, more common and more "fun destroying" for everyone. That's my opinion, feel free to disagree. But before all this zone strat/resupply stuff/perks to the winners stuff was added, you rarely saw the stuff we both find less appealing in the game.

Just goes back to what Batz said.)

The reason you can't see the analogy is because you are not interested in/cannot see the need for* (*delete as applicable) strat. I might as well be trying to sell ice cubes to eskimos. But hey, it wasn't a private email. I set out my views for all to see.

The behaviours I detest? Well certainly the suiciding. I've said it enough times. I don't agree that adding strat caused the idiotic gameplay we now see. WB had more strat added over the years, but we never got the pork-n-auger suicide crap at the sort of levels we see in AH. (Granted, the fuel tanks in WB played no part in determining the amount of fuel available at the base)

Nope. It's all about numbers - by which I mean subscribership levels. Being a flat rate game, the producers need to get as many new accounts as possible for a flat rate strategy to work. So we get the kidz, and the tardz. The sort of wankbags I see in AH every sortie just didn't come to WB. Those people have no interest in WW2, and would not have been prepared to pay $2/hour - for a game all about WW2. Here, it's 50 cents a day, so every Jo Schmo can afford it. And all a lot of them want is aerial Quake. Forget the gameplay, forget the presence (or absence) of strat. The kidz/tardz/wankbagz levels in the arena are directly related to one thing and one thing only. And it's not strat.

It's money.

[Sharky]

Humm,

Well the way I see it, if the "war" is to be won, then it would have to take longer to rebuild something than to destroy it.  Remove or modify this in any way and you revert to the old stalemates that kept the same (especially the large ones) maps in the arena forever.

Now Toad and his followers would be happy if we eliminated the "war" altogether.  As he said he's just looking for the fight.  One would have to deduce from his statements that a map consisting of 3 fields a short distance from each other and not destroyable or captureable would suit his "needs" in the game just fine.  Ok maybe more than 3 fields just for variety but the concept is sound.

Now beetle wants to have a war to win, but one that is based on succes in aircombat not fuel porking/steam rolling/milkrunning correct?  So in his case a system where a moveable "front" that captured fields automaticly as fields fell "behind" the lines as they moved.  Now the pilots would have now direct effect on the base capture, ie droping bombs on fuel dumps would have no effect until/unless the "front" moved past that field.

It seems that the system discribed in the last paragraph would suit both.   No milkruns because they would accomplish nothing.  No suicide fuel porkers because again they would accomplish nothing.

Seems we have found the solution.  And yes I know it has been suggested before.  One problem though, what about the guys that like to fly bombers or Jabo sorties?  Seems they won't have a roll in the above system.

So the problem remains.  If the bombers and Jabo guys have to have targets to destroy, then there has to exist the fact that people will explot it by the fly, lawndart, fly method.  Additionally the bombers/jabos that can't get people to fly escort are going to go where they have a chance to make a contribution AND have a chance of at least making it to the target ie milkruns where the fight ain't.

The fact remains that how "balanced" the MA is depends on how the people in it try to make it.  If we all decided we are going to play the game our way and our way alone then others will do the same to us.  If we are unwilling to support them in what they want to do now and again, how can we expect them to support how we want to play?

Furballers, try helping to take a field now and then, carry a couple of bombs on the way to the furball and drop them on the GV hanger before starting to churn and burn.  Join a, god forbid, mission now and again or better yet start one to capture a field.

Strat guys,  see a good furball happening between two close fields?  Don't always make a beeline to it to kill the fuel dumps or kill the CV.  Grab a lite fighter and clear a 6 or two.

Face it girls.  The only way we can have an areana that caters to everyone is to cooperate with each other every now and again.  Cultivate the good behavior and GENTLY chastise the poor.

Just my $.02
Sharky

[Mini D]

Wow toad... revisionist memory is a something you should have printed on a tee-shirt and wear at all times.

I guess if there's a feature you don't like, you have someone handy to blame for it.  You may want to research the rearm pads just a tad bit and find out what your twin had to say on the subject.  It's all there to see who was requesting what.

As for the maprooms being moved... don't think it had anything to do with plane guns.  Carbombing affected fighters and bombers... but the plane rolling and straffing was never really an issue.  Unless, of course, you decide it was and then figure that simply must have been the reason they created the towns and moved the map room.

So you were able to make two passes and get 3 stuctures... good for you.  Do it at a forward base that's loaded.  Even the "ace" skurj say's the 3rd pass is highly unlikely.  Depending on if defending 1 plane is over 10 k... the odds go down drastically.  Of course, this all does boil down to whether or not there is a defending plane.  Which usually... there isn't.  Just people complaining about how easily the enemy can fly to a base and attack it.

If you want fighting, without anyone bothering you.  There is a very simple solution.  Move to the dueling arena.  The 5 or 6 of you that think this is all there should be to the game will enjoy yourselves immensely.  If you want to accept that there needs to be an overall goal to the game and thus there needs to be strat then stay in the MA... because that will always be the case there.  

Of course, you may also discover that you can keep plenty busy even doing what you want in the MA... but that's going to involve you actually making an effort at times and even possibly not being successful.  Something a few people are saying they shouldn't have to do.  All the while, complaining about how "effortless" someone else has it and how that simply has to stop.

Making it difficult for strat just to make it easy for furballers.  No real conflict there eh?

MiniD

[Toad]

Lol mini!

READ what Skurj said:

2 passes? Usually, rare to need 3...

I believe he's saying he USUALLY does it in 2 passes and it's RARE to need 3 to knock the fuel down to 25%.

But perhaps he'll return and clear this up.

As for me, it was two passes, FOUR structures, at a forward front line base with fighters overhead. Ask Math.. he saw it all and got me too late. Which is the point a lot of folks made when the "defend your fuel" comments are made. Dang hard to stop somebody in the dive.

First pass took out the two fuel tanks situated close together on the NE side with one bomb each continuing on to kill the SW fuel tank with rockets. A vertical whiferdill and back down to rocket the barracks that sits right next to the other fuel tank which was already burning, so I took the barracks. Another veritical move and the nose was coming into line with an ammo bunker when Math took me out with a prolonged burst.

So, two passe would easily have taken all the fuel, had the one by the barracks I destroyed been up.

Rearm pad threads?

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14629&highlight=rearm

Pyro:

Added hot refuel/rearm points to the airbases. These are seen as strips of steel planking just off the runways. Stopping on these for thirty seconds will rearm and refuel your plane and your sortie will be considered continued for scoring purposes[/color][/size]. Damage to your plane will not be repaired.

Guess Pyro didn't check with you before he wrote that. Note it says not one thing about "continuing to fight and defend".

Maybe he should revise history, eh? Or do you already make your own T-shirts?

Amazing how you continue to dig.


As for ideas, I think Icemaw probably had the best in another thread. Maybe something should be substituted for fuel as a strat target. Something that, having it, makes field capture easier or more effective and not having it increases difficulty.

Leave fuel out of it. That way, all planes in the planeset are viable all the time on all size maps, but a "replacement" factor substitutes as a strat object so there's no change in the number of those.

As for fighting "without anyone bothering you", surely you're not totally unaware of what we've been saying are you?

No one wants to take anything AWAY from other players.. they just want room to play IN THE MA in their style as well.

For example, enough gas to take an FM-2 or F4U-1 out on a big map and be able to fly a sector + to a fight and have enough fuel to actually fight a while when you get there. I'm not even asking for enough to RTB.

But, hey, change the argument and don't address the issue. It's what all of you continue to do in this "go to the DA" regard.


As a side note, most of you guys criticize Laz' "bases closer together" idea. But have you noticed the Trinity complaints when down when NB changed some VH to AF and added a few AF and CV's? The effect, of course, was to move the fields closer together. And, clearly, it made the map a much better map FOR ALL PLAYERS. Also made the fuel limited part of the planeset MUCH more viable on Trinity.

That's what's really being discussed here.

[SKurj]

Usually 2 passes even if defence is up...  If defence is over 10k, and follows my dive in... well ok, I'll get at least one fuel before I pop.  Defence isn't usually a concern until all the ord is gone...

2 1k eggs... line up first pass so ya can drop 1 each on two targets.

Extend line up for next pass with rockets..   3 rockets per target, again get targets fairly lined up before makin run.  This tactic can take out all 8 fuel tanks at a huge base if you get a bit lucky.

Sadly the medium field differs from the huge and small fields in that it has 6 separate tanks, so probably 3 passes with luck at a medium field.


BUT wtf you guys doin? gonna argue this one over and over?


SKurj

[Toad]

Dunno  Skurj.

Ever since AkDeja became MiniD it's like he's living in an alternate universe that is exactly the same in every detail, only completely different.

I mean, cripes.. how many guys that have spent much time in the MA have NOT seen a small field fuel-porked in two passes? And it's near impossible to stop them once they're in the dive. Yeah, you'll get 'em, but not until after they get some drops in.

But MiniD says it:

MiniD:

is now, and will forever be a rediculous statement.

Then he can't even decipher your simple, straightforward statment.

Follows by yanking out some totally "other universe" memories of what the purpose of rearm pads was when implemented.

Tops it off by including a few barbs like:

revisionist memory is a something you should have printed on a tee-shirt and wear at all times

Ad hominem instead of just arguing the point with fact. Tough to respect that.

Hey, I used to really admire AKDejaVu.

This new guy that's exactly the same only completely diffferent from an alternate universe I simply don't understand.

But I'm trying.

[Mini D]

This is the problem...

Someone is convinced the MA sucks.  It's not really possible to prove otherwise because that person is simply blind to everything except proving himself right.

It's pretty damn hard to tell someone to like the game again and to stop nitpicking.  "Oh yea... well what about the time I saw someone...."  It's the perfect argument toad.

I can't believe you've played this game as long as you have and you can't figure out how to have fun in it.  I am forced to believe you've simply stopped trying.  It's a sad thing to see.  It's especially sad to see you insist on making a point of it.

Start playing the game again toad.  Stop hiding in the ack insulting anyone that comes near and actually start playing.  Get off channel 1 and get off the bbs.  Neither are helping you enjoy things at all.

Seriously toad.  Stop trying to prove how crappy the game is and start trying to enjoy it.  Either that or stop playing cause you've simply forgotten what a game is all about.

MiniD